To comply with European Union law, we are required to inform users accessing "overunity.com" from within the
EU about the cookies that this site uses and the information they contain and also provide them with the means
to "opt-in" - in other words, permit the site to set cookies.
Cookies are small files that are stored by your browser and all browsers have an option whereby you can inspect
the content of these files and delete them if you wish.

The following table details the name of each cookie, where it comes from and what we know about the information
that cookie stores:

Cookie

Origin

Persistency

Information and Usage

ecl_auth

overunity.com

Expires after 30 days

This cookie contains the text "EU Cookie Law - LiPF cookies authorised".
Without this cookie, the Forums' software is prevented from setting other cookies.

SMFCookie648

overunity.com

Expires according to user-chosen session duration

If you log-in as a member of this site, this cookie contains your user name, an encrypted hash of
your password and the time you logged-in. It is used by the site software to ensure that features such as indicating
new Forum and Private messages are indicated to you. This cookie is essential for the site software to work correctly.

PHPSESSID

overunity.com

Current session only

This cookie contains a unique Session Identification value. It is set for both members and
non-members (guests) and it is essential for the site software to work correctly. This cookie is not persistent
and should be automatically removed when you close the browser window.

pmx_upshr{NAME}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records your display preferences for the site's Portal page if a panel
or individual block is collapsed or expanded

pmx_pgidx_blk{ID}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records the page number for the site's Portal page if the page for a
individual block is changed.

pmx_cbtstat{ID}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records the expand/collapse state for a CBT Navigator block content.

pmx_poll{ID}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records the id for the current poll in a multiple Poll block.

pmx_{fadername}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records the state for a Opac-Fader block.

pmx_LSBsub{ID}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records the current category and the state for a static Category block.

pmx_shout{ID}

overunity.com

Current session only

These cookies are set to records the current state of a Shout box block.

pmx_php_ckeck

overunity.com

Page load time

This cookie will probably never see you. It is set, if a Syntax check on a PHP block is initiated
and will be deleted if the function executed.

pmx_YOfs

overunity.com

Page load time

This cookie will probably never see you. It is set on portal actions like click on a page number.
The cookie is evaluated on load the desired page and then deleted. It is used to restore the vertical screen position
as before the click.

Notes:

1

We are aware that Google uses additional cookies it stores on your PC and when you browse our site and all other
sites. These are used to target advertising and Google currently does this without seeking your permission. Four of
these cookies we know about are named "rememberme", "NID", "PREF" and "PP_TOS_ACK"
and are stored in Google's cache on your computer.

2

If you are accessing this site using someone else's computer, please ask the owner's permission before
accepting cookies.

3

Your browser provides you with the ability to inspect all cookies stored on your PC. In addition your browser
is responsible for removing "current session only" cookies and those that have expired; if your browser is
not doing this, you should report the matter to your browser's authors.

4

We regret and apologies for any inconvenience this causes to members and guests who are accessing our web site
from outside the European Union. It is not currently possible for us to interrogate your browser and obtain geographic
location information in order to decide whether or not to prompt you to accept cookies.

For further and fuller information about cookies and their use, please visit
All About Cookies

So you're claiming that the one cycle YOG video does not show gain energy from the magnetic array. That is lifting 12lbs of weight higher then without the magnets.

I clearly see the "gain" in energy for the one cycle. Your fundamental flaw is that it would be more appropriate to call that a half-cycle. You simply have to account for the full cycle (left swing then right swing) in the operation of the device. In your second last clip you clearly show how during the second half of the cycle you loose energy and the pendulum does not come back all the way, which is exactly the same thing that happens in Adminonduty's clip. The pendulum by definition has to do the two half-cycles to complete a full cycle. The net energy gain when it swings through the two half-cycles to do a single full cycle is zero. This is an intellectual leap that your mind has to make to truly understand what is going on.

Howard Johnson never delivered anything that actually worked from what I could gather by doing some critical researching online. He passed away and his "research" has been actively been promoted as part of the mythos of free energy devices by those people that stand to gain financially because of this. Is someone out there selling Howard Johnson books or DVDs? I bet you they are and it would take me about five minutes worth of searching to dig this up.

Synchro1:

No need to start name calling. That also applies to you too Howard. You made a couple of vague postings here and on the EF about a "pulse solenoid with power recovery" to flip the magnet around and you even believe that this could be an OU device and the battery powering it will never need charging. I can tell by your choice of words that you have only a very basic and very limited knowledge about energy and electronics and what you are saying is simply not going to work. You are simply fantasizing about an imaginary device that will somehow flip the magnet for Howard's pendulum without being able to give precise details. If you think that I am simply giving you a hard time then I challenge you to post a schematic and build it. Post the schematic first and explain how you think it will work first though because I am 100% confident that I could explain to you how it will NOT work and I don't want you to waste your time any more than I want Howard to waste his time.

It's nice to fantasize that a swinging pendulum with a "Howard Johnson" magnet array could be a source of free energy. The reality is that looking at your clips it is obvious that there is nothing there. This is no surprise and countless people have tried to do something similar before and all of them have failed. It's not because they made a mistake in their designs or theories, it's because the real theory - the real thing - states that this is impossible.

It's all about understanding how magnetic potential energy can be converted into rotational kinetic energy and vice-versa. The gravity is not really a factor because it is energy-neutral. The magnets are also energy-neutral, acting exactly like massless invisible springs.

You can allege that I am a "bad guy" all you want, but the truth is that I am a "good guy."

@wattbuilderas I said "ignorance is bliss". It seems you do not accept rational debate or questioning of your theories which have not been supported with any evidence that is beyond reasonable doubt.When people are trying to help in pointing out possible flaws, you say they are clouding the issues.Take some advice, go read the Mylow thread. Many peoples reputations were destroyed over that. I have nothing more to say on this matter, but keep your eye on google as your name has been promoted to scam status (not by me, but you must realise many hundreds read this forum). It often amazes me the number of emails I get far exceed the posts on the forums in these cases.

Ali knows first hand my intentions and assistance I am willing to provide and how that assistance can be helpful in progressing a project. Ali is making great progress and I am sure we will be hearing from him soon. Ali was willing to listen to people with the expertise needed to assist him and not discount what they say. He is a brilliant man himself with the wisdom to know that others could help him rather than bury his head in the sand as you have chosen..However it seems that if we do not accept your theories and evidence as presented then we are wrong and are harmful to you. What a lot of BS You will gather your following of believers (self deceivers) and I hope you enjoy your ten minutes of fame.

Often I am attacked (and yes my family has even been physically threatened) when I have conducted tests or arranged testing for devices when the results are not what the inventor wanted to hear.

Actually I must thank you at this stage. It is people like you who enhance my reputation and credability. Thank you.

I and many other do want to help, but your arrogance and ego seem to be self defeating.Good Luck (PS I do mean luck as you have abandoned rational thought and logic)

I will not clutter this thread for a while , i will just drop in now and then and say hi

@Mile HighYu claims his bi directional track accelerates the reversed magnet the same amount in both directions. How do you account for the apparent equal acceleration both ways when your theory would generate an unequal one? Any off the shelf solenoid would move a throw arm with a lever and pitmanthat would turn a wheel 180 degrees. Who are you to insult my vocabulary?You don't take the time to try and understand what people are saying. I never said the unit would self power. I included a Joule thief charger for that.

I already explained that even if you could rotate the magnet by 180 degrees with a perfect stystem you would still have to expend energy to rotate the magnet against the magnetic field generated by the array.

If you think that you have a truly viable system for rotating the magnet then post mechanical and schematic diagrams and explain how it would work, talk is cheap.

Quote

I never said the unit would self power. I included a Joule thief charger for that.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. A Joule Thief charger? Like I said above, you are just throwing catch phrases around without any real meaning. You can't just "throw a Joule Thief" at the problem. You should avoid the temptation to speak in free energy pseudo techno babble. You have to be specific and real.

The bottom line is that any unpowered mechanical system to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees would stop the pendulum cold in it's tracks in three or four cycles. Any mechanical system powered by a battery to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees would require way more battery power than you could ever possibly extract from the pendulum. Plus the only reason that you would have an apparent "gain" for each half-swing if you rotate the magnet by 180 degrees is because you are "forgetting" about the amount of energy you would have to expend to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees against the resistrance of the array's magnetic field. It's a no-win situation.

@MileHigh,Itâ€™s clear how your mind rationalize things. In my demo video I said one swing is a cycle. Then your mind changes the definition into two swings are a cycle. Then you compute the swing does not come back all the way. Of course it doesnâ€™t that way. You did not add in the flip in between the swing.

Your whole grounds for logic is irrelevant until you can get past this.

I clearly see the "gain" in energy for the one cycle. Your fundamental flaw is that it would be more appropriate to call that a half-cycle. You simply have to account for the full cycle (left swing then right swing) in the operation of the device. In your second last clip you clearly show how during the second half of the cycle you loose energy and the pendulum does not come back all the way, which is exactly the same thing that happens in Adminonduty's clip. The pendulum by definition has to do the two half-cycles to complete a full cycle. The net energy gain when it swings through the two half-cycles to do a single full cycle is zero. This is an intellectual leap that your mind has to make to truly understand what is going on.

Even Synchro1 pointed it out to you.

He is contributing â€“ listing at theories, looking at data and giving a suggestion on how to move forward.

As far as the name calling! Didnâ€™t you post this to me from the start of the thread?

It is crystal clear to me that what you are doing is without merit, you are chasing after a pipe dream. I know that you will disagree hence my suggestion for the one-year time limit.

MileHigh

@Mark Dansie,

Great ! Take a break collect your thoughts!

Maybe now the other members of this community will get a chance to post.

Mark Dansie and MileHigh you are both welcome to come back to this thread later when more advancements have been made. Simply Iâ€™m not finish. Just remember to allow other members views and not dominate theirs.

Take heed of MH's and MD's advice. In your defence however, yes the magnet array IS responsible for most if not all the added rotation of your pendulum, but as MH has said, this gain is offset by the energy required to rotate the magnet.

Check Rickoff's (among several others) setup as well. He hit a wall when it came down to making it self rotate. In fact all have hit this wall.

Your setup is not all that unique, but rather a variation of an old theme/concept. No one has yet overcome the entry problem....energy seems well conserved in all cases thus far.

I already explained that even if you could rotate the magnet by 180 degrees with a perfect stystem you would still have to expend energy to rotate the magnet against the magnetic field generated by the array.

If you think that you have a truly viable system for rotating the magnet then post mechanical and schematic diagrams and explain how it would work, talk is cheap.

You seem to be contradicting yourself. A Joule Thief charger? Like I said above, you are just throwing catch phrases around without any real meaning. You can't just "throw a Joule Thief" at the problem. You should avoid the temptation to speak in free energy pseudo techno babble. You have to be specific and real.

The bottom line is that any unpowered mechanical system to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees would stop the pendulum cold in it's tracks in three or four cycles. Any mechanical system powered by a battery to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees would require way more battery power than you could ever possibly extract from the pendulum. Plus the only reason that you would have an apparent "gain" for each half-swing if you rotate the magnet by 180 degrees is because you are "forgetting" about the amount of energy you would have to expend to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees against the resistrance of the array's magnetic field. It's a no-win situation.

MileHigh

We should be giving Howard words of encouragement, not discouragement.

If the goal is achieved then brilliant, and if it doesn't then at least he tried.

Take heed of MH's and MD's advice. In your defence however, yes the magnet array IS responsible for most if not all the added rotation of your pendulum, but as MH has said, this gain is offset by the energy required to rotate the magnet.

@poynt99Yes, I agree and to add on that. The energy gain can be increased simply by increasing the scale, magnet strength or array setup past any offset energy requirements. The drive magnet does not rotate in the array, there are no fields to over come during rotation.

Plus the only reason that you would have an apparent "gain" for each half-swing if you rotate the magnet by 180 degrees is because you are "forgetting" about the amount of energy you would have to expend to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees against the resistrance of the array's magnetic field. It's a no-win situation.

MileHigh

@Poynt99, The resistance at the entry point is not a problem any more when the proven results are a positive gain out the other end.

I view it as an efficiency factor. That will only increase the magnetic energy captured.

There's a self running Galvanic pile pendulum oscillator that has run continuously in a vacuum jar in the British Museum for nearly 150 years! Let me point out that Mile high sounds like an outrageous Gadfly or a Clown when he alledges that the servo magnet rotates inside the array. My advice is for him to get his eyes checked. Also, the resonant tank circuit, can be wired with the capacitor in series with the inductor or in parallel. A linear solenoid has two wires leading from the coil. One coil wire goes to the positive pole of the capacitor, and the negative pole of the capacitor goes to the negative pole of the battery. The other wire from the coil goes to one end of a reed switch, and the other end to the positive pole of the battery. When the switch is closed by the trigger magnet, a power pulse travels from the capacitor to coil to magnetise it, and is reinforced by backup current from the battery. When the switch opens, the power from the collapsing magnetic field is recaptured by the capacitor which has a Farad balance with the induction Henry's from the coil, and is ready to recharge the coil again. This is called an LC feedback resonant tank circuit, and works with pulse coils. Howard is using a very inefficient stepper motor, which consumes much more power.

You have to try to avoid the temptation to taking leaps of faith into the unknown. In your clip where you "demonstrate gains" you never considered the shifting weight causing the increased swing amplitudes until myself and several other people hammered the point home until you acknowledged it. If nobody said anything you would still be self-deluded in thinking that you had "proved" that you were on the right track. By the same token, Poynt99 agrees with me that it would take energy to rotate the magnet by 180 degrees at the end of each swing. This is not an error, it simply has to be for things to stay in balance. You seem to be assuming that I am wrong without testing this yourself. With some careful experimenting with a perfectly balanced magnet on a rotating axis you should be able to prove this yourself. Why are you saying that I am wrong? What is your reasoning? You can't just assume things.

Synchro1:

Enough with the name calling, try discussing things where you make rational points that you can back up. You are putting words into my mouth when you state that I allege that the servo magnet "rotates inside the array." I never said that. Also, forget about trying to describe a circuit in text, it simply doesn't work. I will repeat what I said to you before; if you have an idea for a circuit, post the mechanical and electrical schematic and explain how it works to everyone reading this thread. I don't buy what you are saying at all, you are just in a spin zone. You are alleging that you have a more efficient solution for rotating the magnet by 180 degrees at the end of each swing? Then bring it on, schematic diagrams and a full explanation of what's going on referencing your schematics.

It is incredible seeing the "two cultures" in action yet again. People like myself and Poynt try to be flexible and offer a wide latitude in our understanding of your statements when we make our rebuttals to the points that you and Howard make. You guys being the "believers" will focus in on a narrow point made by myself or Poynt99 and ignore the context and offer no latitude in your understanding of our statements before you make your rebuttals. If you can't make a logical argument then you start name calling. You also simply ignore all relevant points made by the "other side" that you can't rebut or don't understand or are unwilling to consider. Such is life.

The "Rickoff" example is a very good one with respect to the viability of this project. He built his wheel because of the Mylow affair and long after Mylow was proven to be a fake he continued building. His language early on in the project was overconfident, he was convinced that he was going to have a continuously spinning wheel if he found the "magic Mylow configuration." This was a stillborn project from the very beginning and it is a shame to see it all end up being nothing more than time, money, and mental and physical energy being poured down the drain.

I know that Howard is not going to stop, so that's why I suggested that he give himself a year before he calls it quits. Life is short and I am sure that there are better things that he can do.